Talk:Seasick Steve

When Did He Run Away?

I thought he ran away from home when he was 14 years old, as per his song, dog house boogie ('I left home when i was 14 years of age/i figured i could do it better on my own'), but it's been changed to 13. Does anyone know for definate?JimHxn (talk) 15:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I kind of figured this was where the misunderstanding came from: I'm pretty sure he actually sings "I left home before (or befo') I was 14 years of age." He also mentioned 13 at a show if I'm not mistaken (pukkelpop 2007), and that's also what my source says. Listen to it again, and tell me what you think. Key (talk) 17:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Yep! Ok, thank you, I agree with you, after re-listening. Just wondered thats all! Cheers JimHxn (talk) 21:27, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Key (talk) 09:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I've heard Steve say that in the song too. But this report [1], which is substantial and interesting, quotes him saying "Leaving home at 14 wasn't my choice." That may be a stronger reference than what he says during the song. Let's keep the issue open.

Earthlyreason (talk) 12:22, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Not done: {{edit protected}} is not required for edits to unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 01:50, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Steve's age

An anonymous user (82.12.186.88) is repeatedly removing Steve's age, and claiming there is “speculation in the media” about it, without giving references. He/she writes that Steve does not want his age known, but should note that this is an encyclopedia, not a fan page.

I have put back the long-standing birth date of 'circa 1941', along with three references [2][3][4]. (It is possible to find a year older or younger [5], [6], hence the use of 'circa'.) But this user's attempt to introduce doubt about his age is not supported by the evidence.

Please revert any further such unreferenced deletion.

A point this user makes about Steve's superstition following a heart attack (eg. see [7]) could go back in, but not in the lead paragraph. It would refer to his character and experience, not the basic fact of his age.

Finally, as a show of good faith, I have retained the same user's note that Steve's son designs and runs Steve's official websites (even though it is unreferenced). Earthlyreason (talk) 21:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

He is born in 1951. http://skattelister.aftenposten.no/skattelister/soek.htm?firstMiddleName=steven+gene&lastName=wold&countyId=&x=0&y=0&srchMode=smpl&taxYear=2007 It is from the Norwegian tax office. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.39.240.23 (talk) 04:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

That's interesting. Earthlyreason (talk) 11:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Not convinced that his age is correct, he stated in an interview in 2000 http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/reluctant-icon/Content?oid=6010 so maybe part of the embilishment of his backstory is to increase his age. Best guess based on this article is 62. Similarly backed up by the Norwegian tax office record above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.100.70 (talk) 11:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Steve Wold is an American citizen and pays taxes in the USA. This Norwegian tax document is nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.200.24.133 (talk) 14:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Steven Gene Wold may be an American passport holder, can you provide evidence of that and of him solely paying taxes in the USA? He certainly has a company in Norway and will pay taxes in that country. The Norwegian tax office reference is not bogus. see http://norwaycompanies.org/seasick-steve-as.146292.norway-company.html . His age was given correctly by himself in the days when he was not famous as a performer nor trying to create a 'certain' persona. It's only now that hazing of his age has become an issue. His DOB is 1951, if this cannot be verified beyond all reasonable doubt then there should be no DOB quoted at all. Currently the best estimate has two sources. see http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=no&u=http://www.nrk.no/skattelister2009/steven_gene_wold~1875468/&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dsteven%2Bgene%2Bwold%2B1951%26safe%3Dactive%26biw%3D1328%26bih%3D643 for Norwegian tax office record. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.100.70 (talk) 11:08, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

3 string tuning

The 3 string trance wonder is stringed and tuned as follows (shown in 6 string tab format):

No String
G string tuned to B
D string tuned to G (8va)
No String
E string tuned to G
No String

Hope this clears things up!

JimHxn (talk) 20:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Biography

Hi All,

There are many quotes regarding his correct age. Perhaps if people who are related to Steve in Norway stopped editing WP to suit themsleves we may get closer to reality. (Redacted) is recorded as being born in 1951 see (Redacted) This is Steve Wold's name at borth and the name he used for many years. He Married his current wife using this name, see (Redacted) So, two references to Steve Wold's (born as (Redacted)) age. Whatever name he chooses to use is none of my business, but his DOB is 1951. Furthermore in the late 1990's to early 2000's Steve Wold made multiple usenet postings where he discussed his work and relationship to various artistes, these are a matter of fact and not in dispute. In those postings he used an email address than was based on his US amateur radio licence. This is listed by the FCC and, again, is not a fact that is in doubt. I do not wish to give this information unless neccessary.

I do not want to see this edit-war continue, unless backed by fact and reference in this talk page. All future edits regarding his age will be regarded as vandalism and reverted unless discussed beforehand on this talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trunky (talk • contribs) 18:48, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

You are making some pretty big assumptions here. I have no problem with what has been said about his age but to state catagorically that Steve Wolds name at birth was this or that seems to be pretty baseless upon what you have presented. Nothing you have presented here connects these two people at all. How do you know this was his name. You have not made that connection at all. You have just made, as far as I can see, statements based on hersay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.222.62 (talk) 20:46, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Follow the links given, see for yourself. Unless Steve's current wife married anothere Steven Gene (Redacted) in the same year that she married Steven Gene Wold then.... Heck, you know what I am saying. Steve used to use the email address (Redacted) which is his USA amateur radio callsign, which according to the FCC is allocated to (Redacted)

Anyway, far far more evidence of actual fact than you are providing for your vandalism, so, unless you can provide evidence to the contrary then please cease your vandalism.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Trunky (talk • contribs) 21:05, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I challange anyone on here to find one article, ONE article where Steve Wold has stated or confirmed how old he is. You all act like this is somthing he has created when in reality it has all been created by the press and some people on Wiki. All this becuase he has not talked about his age. Amazing! You also claim you do not care what name he goes by but keep insisting on putting up another name you claim was his (obviously not his any longer, if ever). Even if it were true, you contradict yourself. Sounds to me like you have some personal issues here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.222.62 (talk) 07:00, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Sure, no problem, please read http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/reluctant-icon/Content?oid=6010 from December 2000 where Steve Wold before he became famous as an artiste and was plain old Steve Wold of Moon Music said ""This is it," says Wold about his reasons for leaving. "I'm finished with America. I'm 50 years old now, and I've been watching greed play the main stage since I was a teenager. I just can't stand it anymore." " — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trunky (talk • contribs) 08:59, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Good work! But old news. Just like all the other articles where he has been miss quoted this also must be the truth just because its printed.

I was actually speaking of an article since he has been well known. I also noticed you have not commented about your personel motivation.

Smells a little.

Will be repoting you to Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.222.62 (talk) 10:01, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

My only motivation is to help create a factual wikipedia, not resort to personal attacks like you seem to be interested in. What is your motivation for changing the DOB? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trunky (talk • contribs) 13:12, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I strongly feel that Steve's name should be changed back to what it was listed as previously, "Steven Gene Wold". The reason for this is that, regardless of whether or not the connection you seem to have made to "(Redacted)" is accurate or not, it's pretty obvious that Steve's right legal name is (and has clearly been for many years) "Wold". If, in fact, the (Redacted) you've found is the same Steve Wold this Wikipedia article is about, he surely had some personal reason for changing his name and I think we should show a little decency and respect that.

Every single article and reference with regards to Steve and his music is all under the name "Steve Wold" and so I don't see any point or benefit to continuing like this. In the same way that you wouldn't go on some famous married woman's Wikipedia article and forcibly change her name back to her maiden name. What's the point?

At the end of the day, we're not talking about a politician we've voted into office that's making big important decisions that will affect all of us -- we're talking about a musician and an artist and it's obscene to think that every little detail of their past lives should be dug up and put on display just for the sake of it.

There are plenty of other, more important inaccuracies all over Wikipedia that would be better served by your attentions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ommony (talk • contribs) 13:32, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

The heading is "Birth name" not currently used name, and follows the WP BLP policy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trunky (talk • contribs) 13:41, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Following on from there, you don't have any way of knowing whether "(Redacted)" was his birth name. You've made a somewhat convincing connection that Steve went by the name "(Redacted)" at some point in his life, but there isn't any actual proof. Besides, Steve has made mention of being adopted at a very young age and could very well have changed names several times. The point is, there's no way to know for sure without actually speaking with Steve, and more importantly, it's not at all relevant to his career, music, public life, wikipedia article, or anything else.

The reason I had changed his age/birthdate back to the commonly cited, is that your changes rely heavily on the assumption that the circumstantial evidence you have about this supposed "(Redacted)" connection is accurate. Again, lacking any concrete proof, I don't see the point in continuing to confuse the issue. All you're accomplishing, really, is for people that visit the article to be constantly getting different answers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.70.106 (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I added semi-protection recently after a request on RfPP from Trunky. Trunky, I see now that you're adding material about the subject and the subject's wife that isn't sourced to secondary sources, which is a violation of the BLP policy, specifically WP:BLPPRIMARY. Whatever the secondary sources say, and what the subject says about himself, is what this article should say, with few exceptions. I've reverted some of the recent changes, though I'm not sure how far back it would be best to go. I'm therefore going to lift the semi-protection in case there are other issues. Please proceed with caution given that this is a BLP. Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 16:46, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Jail and concerts

Last first: the itemising of what amoints to a chronological list of concert appearances in the UK is undue weight & arguably promotional/fan cruft.

SS has admitted to bring jailed but I don't know what for. Eg: "Back in the 60s when I talked to black people, especially like when I was in jail, about the blues, they said don't talk that slave shit to me. They were uninterested." - Blues America: Bright Lights, Big City (BBC 2013, broadcast of 6 December 2013 on BBC Four, ca. 20 minutes in). - Sitush (talk) 20:30, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Ten refs for birth day?

Do we really need ten references in the lede for his birth-date?--Раціональне анархіст (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2014

(Redacted) http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasick_Steve lists his correct dob and sufficient references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.100.70 (talk) 10:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, ten references is plainly WP:CITEOVERKILL. What are the strongest sources we've got? --McGeddon (talk) 11:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Variance from other Wikipedia articles?

I am curious as to why the English entry is at variance so much with the Norwegian entry (https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasick_Steve) particularly with respect to the subjects age? The Norwegian entry seems very well referenced to support a birth year of 1951. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.100.70 (talk) 08:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Both Wikipedia pages are there for the public to see. The main one being the English language page and very well referenced. The other, the Norwegian page, also referenced to a lesser extent. (a number of the references go to invalid pages). Both are there, valid and available to see.

Your edit here is an obvious blatant attempt to try and introduce content on this page which you have continued to try and do, one way or another.

Your history for vandalism here, especially in July on the Seasick Steve main page and also your contentious editing here on the talk page has been reported to Wikipedia. Aircastle (talk) 12:56, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Your aggression and accusations are quite disappointing. I have known Steve (Redacted) for a long time, since his early days as an EMT in TN. I am simply asking a question as to why two Wiki pages can have such differing ages given and both be equally well referenced? Perhaps the lesser known norwegian wiki entry(https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasick_Steve) is less subject to 'scrutiny' than the English page? Certainly, it gives many and much more credible primary references for an alternative age and DOB of Seasick steve of 19th March 1951. 80.195.100.70 (talk) 09:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

You have no source for the name (Redacted).

Who you have know and what you know personally is not a source.

I see know that you are also most likely past editor Trunky from your history.

If so, you were warned by Wiki Administrator SlimVirgin.

Even if not,see below.

I added semi-protection recently after a request on RfPP from Trunky. Trunky, I see now that you're adding material about the subject and the subject's wife that isn't sourced to secondary sources, which is a violation of the BLP policy, specifically WP:BLPPRIMARY. Whatever the secondary sources say, and what the subject says about himself, is what this article should say, with few exceptions. I've reverted some of the recent changes, though I'm not sure how far back it would be best to go. I'm therefore going to lift the semi-protection in case there are other issues. Please proceed with caution given that this is a BLP. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 16:46, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Unless you have a source for this name that does not violate WP:BLPPRIMARY you must stop trying to change the subjects name here and also on the main page. You have already been blocked for abuse of editing privileges and continued unsourced editing. Aircastle (talk) 09:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

And so, back to my original question, we have two pages, both well referenced, with differing dates. Which one is wrong? Are both wrong? 80.195.100.70 (talk) 09:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

The Norwegian article does not seem well referenced - it gives a specific birthdate, but none of the references attached to it specify a date of birth. The first source it uses is a 2009 article that has someone describing Steve as "in his 60s", which would put his date of birth at 1949 or earlier. Are any of the other sources any better? --McGeddon (talk) 11:45, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

How about a first person interview? http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/reluctant-icon/Content?oid=6010 Subject states age as 50 in 2000, sugegsting a dob on c.1950. Also the Norwegian tax office has his dob listed as 1951 http://www.proff.no/roller/c60ev-as/sandefjord/kunstnerisk-virksomhet/IGEM58S10P8/ These are both solid and reliable sources.80.195.100.70 (talk) 12:29, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Firstly,there are uncountable articles that state the subjects name as Steve Wold and his birthdate in 1941.

The Norwegian tax document, if real, is a public record therefore a primary source which violates WP:BLPPRIMARY

You (80.185.100.70) claim to know the subject personally. ( which is also not a source) With some of the conentious editing you have done here concerning the subject, it seems there is somthing personel going on here. Wikipedia is not a truth serum to try a force down peoples throats. It is about articles written concerning the subject. In this case a very popular artist. If this subject had a different name at one time, what difference does it make. He has had, the name Steve Wold for many years if not for ever and that is what he should be know by. Aircastle (talk) 13:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

It is best research practice to use the oldest information and a reference dating from 2000 is the oldest one we have, perhaps you don't understand this becasue English is not your primary language? "Wold" could be equated to a stage name, and, to be precise, the infobox states "birth name". Perhaps it should say something else? I do not know SS, I have no idea what makes you come to that conclusion( English problems again, perhaps?) As for not using primary sources, ok, if that's what willipedia says, but what we are left with is regurgitated press releases, often from the subject themselves, which is about as reliable as a not very reliable thing. It somewhat cheapens willipedia.

Aircastle, i think you need to take some chill pills :)80.195.100.70 (talk) 14:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

That is strange. 8 paragraphs up, you state you have known Steve for many years. Now you say you don't know him. Unless there are two of you editing from the same annoymous IP address 80.195.100.70, there is some serious contradiction here. As far as " regurgiated press releases" if this is your complaint then it is obvious that you do not understand what Wikipedia is about. (not willipedia)

"Wold could be equated to a stage name" you say. Funny, i thought Seasick Steve was his stage name. Aircastle (talk) 17:28, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Is that the strongest source we have for a 1951 date of birth - that an interviewer recorded him as saying "I'm finished with America. I'm 50 years old now, and I've been watching greed play the main stage since I was a teenager." once? If this is stacked against reliable press sources stating an age which puts his date of birth at 1941 (and which were not subsequently corrected), I'd assume that Wold may simply have misspoken, or been misheard, in that one interview.

The Norwegian tax office listing doesn't seem conclusive - it could easily be somebody else with the same name. (Wold seems quite a common surname in Norway.) If we had to do further detective work to confirm a match, it'd be WP:SYNTHESIS. --McGeddon (talk) 14:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Daughter?

It is reported that Steven Gene Wold took his wifes surname upon marriage and his birth name is (Redacted). What is the relationship between Steven and (Redacted)? The only documented children are male, so presumably an unknown child or close releative.80.195.100.70 (talk) 10:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Where is this reported? None of this is in the article at present. --McGeddon (talk) 10:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

You are quite correct, this is the talk page.

It may be a jump to far to link him taking his wifes name, but his former manager Joe Cushley stated in this article http://www.thevine.com.au/music/news/the-legend-of-seasick-steve-20090324-258730/ that he used to go by a different name to Wold. Wold is a Norwegian name, his wife is Norwegian, hence the question.

"Wold is a friend of his beard-sake Billy Gibbons from ZZ Top. "He knew him back then," says Cushley. "I think they ... yeah, he knew him then. He met him along the way." He also played bass for the great bluesman Lightnin' Hopkins on a west coast tour. The surname "Wold", like Wold's wife, Elisabeth, comes from Scandinavia. I ask if Steve used to go by another name. "Yes," says Cushley, then I leave the subject alone."

80.195.100.70 (talk) 10:55, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, this would be a jump too far, per WP:SYNTHESIS. All we can usefully say from that single source is that he used to go by a different name. --McGeddon (talk) 11:02, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

I have several sources,however, I would have to double check what I have and then see if it is acceptable to use by wiki standards. I shall whnen time permits thorough research 80.195.100.70 (talk) 11:06, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

In the meantime please refrain from inserting the unsourced alledged last name here without a source. As it says at the heading of this talk page. Content that is contentious and unsourced should be immediately removed from the main page and the talk page. I think this is pretty clear. It is Wikipedia policy to list your source. You personally are not a source .Aircastle (talk) 11:27, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Seasick Steve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100430004817/http://www.brits.co.uk:80/artist/seasick-steve to http://www.brits.co.uk/artist/seasick-steve
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090912035839/http://ripitup.com.au/interviews/13634 to http://www.ripitup.com.au/interviews/13634
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100430004817/http://www.brits.co.uk:80/artist/seasick-steve to http://www.brits.co.uk/artist/seasick-steve

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:13, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

New biography

Someone should acquire the book Seasick Steve: Ramblin’ Man by Matthew Wright (book review), which denies some "facts" from the life story of the artist. Apparently his birth name, birth date, education and early occupations are not like he tells us. Henxter (talk) 08:03, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Wright's research has now been mentioned in the article. Updating the lede to include the suggested birth name and age as statements of fact seems premature, though, when all we've got is one unofficial biography and no apparent reaction from the article subject. I've reverted to the original Wold/1941 version of the lede and infobox for now. --McGeddon (talk) 08:31, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

I did try and tell you this some years ago. The truth will come out 80.195.100.70 (talk) 12:17, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

I have read the Biography of Steve by Matthew Wright and the much alluded to date of birth for Steve is confirmed as 19th March 1951 by Sevrin Johnson. Sevrin is Steve's first born son from Steve's first marriage to Victoria Johnson. His First known name is also confirmed by the same source as Leach, although as he was adopted there may have been an earlier name, but that is not relevant.

It is now time to change the wikipedia entry.

McGeddon - I do not see why it is relevant to wait for a 'reaction' from Steve. There has been a form of omertà running in relation to the biography of Steve since the creation of his hobo act. I suspect several WP editors of having contributed to this. McGeddon, if you cannot be objective over this, then please step away. A large number of articles exist in the Norwegian press in which Steve is clear about his actual age and his original name. These all date from before his 'hobo breakthrough'.

Arguably his biography and musical history is far more interesting than the omertà allows to be published - Appearing as bass player with Shanti, the French disco group Crystal Grass etc.

Can someone allow these edits or make the changes without an edit war occurring? Trunky (talk) 08:34, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

If there are Norwegian press articles where Steve gives this name and birthdate, then sure, this would be entirely uncontroversial. Where are those articles? --McGeddon (talk) 09:10, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Page protection

I've given the page a semi-protect for a week because there has been some edit warring over the biography. Without going too overly much into things, the basic gist is that someone is contending that much of the article is incorrect, however the sources they're providing are in places Wikipedia would not consider reliable enough to completely overturn everything in the article - especially when it comes to things like the birth date. There's also a book, however the publication of one book isn't always seen as absolute proof on Wikipedia and not every publisher passes the rigorous standards of WP:RS. I haven't looked heavily into the publisher so it might be that they are reliable, however labeling them as such requires that we look into their editorial process and reputation, which can take a while. Plus if this is the only source that claims this then we can't really change the entire article accordingly, since that poses a BLP issue if multiple other sources uniformly claim something else entirely.

I'll open up a discussion at RS/N about the publisher and it can go from there. However as far as major changes and inclusion of the book goes, this should be discussed here before it's added, as it poses a BLP issue. Even if the book is correct - and I'm not saying that it is - saying that everything else is incorrect and the result of years of people deliberately hiding the truth is an extremely contentious claim. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:39, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Unauthorised biography claims

This has all gone back into the article today (as direct, voice-of-Wikipedia factual edits to the subject's birthdate, birth name and biography, erasing previous contradictory claims and sources) on the back of a Bob Stanley Guardian music blog review of the book. But WP:NEWSBLOG says to use news blogs "with caution because the blog may not be subject to the news organization's normal fact-checking process" and "note that any exceptional claim would require exceptional sources" - this may still not be ready for prime-time, if a blog review is so far the only impact of the biography.

WP:BLPSOURCES says that "When material is both verifiable and noteworthy, it will have appeared in more reliable sources." and I don't think we've hit that yet. A Guardian blog review is probably enough for a section about the unauthorised biography and its claims, but doesn't seem to be enough to reframe the entire article. --McGeddon (talk) 13:53, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

It's only a matter of time. The truth has been known for some considerable period, it's just a waiting game for enough reliable sources. Trunky (talk) 10:19, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

• Why does it matter how old he is, and what he has previously done? I see this entire discussion as just another attempt to promote Matthew Wright's unauthorised biography... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 10:27, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Of course facts matter, otherwise simply delete the article! He admits himself that he was not born in 1941, see https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.krone.at%2Fmusik%2Fseasick-steve-reiche-sind-oft-ekelerregend-krone-interview-story-530972&edit-text=&act=url "Seasick Steve: Now you get once the cold truth served on the tray - I have never any man ever said my real age. Why do people write then that I was born in 1941?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trunky (talk • contribs) 10:37, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

The article as currently written is misleading and confused. There is clear evidence from the Guardian article, the book itself, and the Richie Unterberger liner notes quoted in the book here, that he was named Steve Leach and that his supposed birth year of 1941 is wrong. That does not mean that the article should reproduce claims in the book as unambiguously accurate - but, it does mean that we should give them due weight, and identify the contradictory claims - along the lines of "Wold has claimed that [X] but the biography by Wright claims [Y]." It is then up to the reader to decide on the truth. There is no good reason for giving greater weight to a 2013 article that mentions his supposed age in passing than to a 2016 article which specifically addresses the question of his age and comes to a different conclusion. As others have said, he has apparently not claimed to have been born in 1941 so it should not be a WP:BLP problem. Many of the statements now set out in the article as fact - based on older sources - now need to contain caveats - "he has claimed that...." - rather than being stated as fact. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:57, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Maybe you can teach an old dog new tricks as Steve Leach discovered when he gave up the day job as Modest Mouse producer and Beach Boys touring member to become Seasick Steve, some homeless guy who ended up on Jools Holland. Apart from the fact that Leach hadn't been homeless since aged 16, it was a good story and fooled the public so much that he ended up as anti-hero of the festival picnic brigade.

Now, who is going to re-jig the article? Trunky (talk) 11:17, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Someone who can express a neutral point of view. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:42, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

I fully agree with that :) I think it needs someone with a little more 'authority' than either of us, although, I am happy to have a go, or if you wanted to, then I would be happy to assist or comment. Trunky (talk) 12:03, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

No-one has any more "authority" here than anyone else, so long as they comply with policy and guidance. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:18, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

That's a little naive I think you'll find :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trunky (talk • contribs) 14:09, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm always grateful for advice, even when it comes from someone who has made a grand total of 50 edits. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:38, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

You display some amazing pomposity! First you claim 'everyone here is equal' and now you are berating me for having 'only 50 edits'. Frankly, I don't care too much about Mr Leach and his 'story', although it would be nice to have some facts in the article rather than the made up rubbish that is currently there. Terrible liar, very accomplished musician whose career started way back. Trunky (talk) 12:19, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

I didn't "berate" you. Maybe he's just trying to boost his authenticity as a bluesman by following the same approach towards "truth" as, say, Sonny Boy Williamson (born 1912. Or 1908. Or 1899..... etc.). Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:39, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

As someone who uses Wikipedia to try to find facts, and couldn't care less about the petty Wikipedia edit rivalry that apparently some people care about, I have to say this article is a perfect example of that ridiculous pettiness. There are ample sources showing that Steven Leach was born in 1951 and subsequently changed his name to Steven Wold, and that this person is the musician known as Seasick Steve. So put it in the article and stop being so silly. 82.17.143.121 (talk) 08:43, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Please log in before editing (using your *main* account and not an alternative account), so that everyone here knows who they're "talking" to. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 09:11, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, will the Virgin Media ip editor from the Derby area identify themselves?Trunky (talk) 12:21, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Given that the unauthorised biography was quite widely publicised at the time, in reliable sources, can someone explain why - in this edit by Ohnoitsjamie in March 2018 - the name of the person making the claims was removed? Whether or not that person has in the past tried to edit this article - for which I haven't seen any evidence - seems completely irrelevant. The claims are, quite rightly, summarised in the article as notable and pertinent, and it seems perverse not to include the name of the biographer making the claims. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:49, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Seasick Steve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080129040717/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk:80/music/gig-23352910-details/Seasick+Steve/gigReview.do?reviewId=23434159 to http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/music/gig-23352910-details/Seasick+Steve/gigReview.do?reviewId=23434159
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090108140705/http://www.musicomh.com/music/features/seasick-steve_0908.htm to http://www.musicomh.com/music/features/seasick-steve_0908.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:52, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

He was born in 1951

SS was born in 1951, why is his DoB given as 1941 on wikipeadia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.146.155 (talk) 18:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

So, we're all happy then?

After years of moaning we've all happily decided that he was born as Steven Gene Leach (not strictly true as he was adopted and that's his adopted name) and the he's born in 1951.

Awesome.

Progress at last. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.100.94 (talk • contribs) 09:33, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm happy with that, though I'm surprised that other editors seem to have ignored the change. If we are now accepting 1951, etc., there do need to be some tweaks to the wording. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:09, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Now tweaked accordingly. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:43, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Why is Wikipedia repeating Matthew Wright's unofficial biography as gospel? Is the logic that the claims made about Steve's past must all be true because otherwise he would have sued Wright's publisher by now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.57.135 (talk) 21:39, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

It's not "gospel", but much of it is supported by or can be verified from other sources, and where they can't it is made clear that they are Wright's claims. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:07, 25 December 2019 (UTC)